Cricket has so much more to worry about than a captain in South Africa’s Faf du Plessis sucking a sweet on the field of play. How can that be a crime? Where do you draw the line, for goodness sake?

Cricketers chew gum. Is that going to be illegal now? They take on energy drinks during play. Does this mean anyone who takes on liquid at a drinks break is forbidden from shining the ball from now on?

What about putting sun cream on and then using your sweat to shine the ball?

Footage has emerged of Virat Kohli appearing to use a sweet to shine the ball against England

Faf du Plessis of South Africa has also found himself in trouble with ball tampering allegations

Share this article

Share

33 shares

I’m pretty certain it’s a good thing for cricketers to protect themselves from the sun but will it now mean they could be on a charge?

This is such a storm in a teacup created by the International Cricket Council and one which spread from South Africa to here in India on Tuesday when it was suggested that Virat Kohli was sucking a mint and shining a ball.

So what? Why don’t the ICC look at the issues that matter?

The ones that the spectators care about? Like poor over-rates and all the interruptions during a day’s play. And Test attendances. And ticket prices. And the quality of facilities at grounds. And participation levels. Perhaps even corruption.

These are the topics that threaten the game. Not sucking a Tic Tac.

I have followed events in Australia this week with utter bemusement. The amount that’s been written about one bloke having a sweet in his mouth while he’s polishing the ball is ridiculous. I am amazed Du Plessis has been punished.

We should remember that the suggestion having sugar in your saliva somehow helps improve and keep the shine on the ball is only a theory anyway. There is no proof it helps you shine the ball.

Du Plessis has been found guilty of ball tampering but hasn't been handed a suspension

Cricket has bigger things to worry about including ticket pricing and empty stadiums

It’s a theory that has been around for years and Marcus Trescothick has admitted he sucked Murray Mints during his time as England’s official ball-shiner in the hope it would do something to help swing.

No one in cricket history has been able to pin-point what exactly makes a ball swing. It’s been beyond some of the greatest scientists of our time, so there’s no proof this is going to help swing.

I have seen a few instances like this over the years — people using lip-salve and Vaseline on the ball, for instance — and I know the laws ban using artificial substances on the ball. But how do you define artificial substances?

And another thing. It’s better if bowlers do get the ball moving around anyway because there’s nothing worse than no movement and a batsman-dominated game where 600 plays 500, leading to a certain draw.

Just as long as it’s not too extreme. Using bottle tops on a ball is obviously wrong as is damaging the ball with your fingernails to try to alter its condition and make it move around. But let’s not be petty.

The precedent set by the ICC is impossible to police and keep consistent. Are we going to have a list of ICC-approved sweets? Are there going to be certain times when you’re not allowed to have a sweet or chew some gum? So players will probably end up just not risking having anything in their mouths during play.

It’s time to worry about the things that matter rather than the small issues. There are plenty of problems in cricket. This isn’t one of them.

Former England batsman Marcus Trescothick admits he used to suck sweets during play